The International Conference on Social Development, organized by the UN and opened on 6 March 1995 in the presence of delegations from more than 130 countries, including Albania, continues its work on 11–12 March with the participation of the heads of state and government of these countries. In his speech, President Berisha will present Albania’s viewpoint on the theme of this Conference. At the end of the Conference’s proceedings, the participating countries will adopt the declaration and action programme of this Summit for Social Development. During his stay in Copenhagen, President Berisha will hold bilateral meetings. Press and Information Office of the President

Press conference of President Berisha Mero Baze, Rilindja: We saw in Shqip a political organization called the Pan-Macedonian Congress oppose your statement with President Herzog that the small minority in southern Albania is an unspecified Slavic minority. In our view, the stability of Macedonia is based on understanding, cooperation and interethnic harmony. In this respect, the issue of the human and national freedoms and rights of Albanians in Macedonia, and their respect and guarantee, is a primary condition, on the one hand, and Marksist on the other; one proved to be a system of true values, a system on which democratic societies developed, while the other proved to be a system of totalitarian values, a dogma of real destruction. Developments show that there was a real genocide there. And hundreds and thousands upon thousands, if not millions, of citizens lost their lives in prisons from hunger and disease, and in catastrophes resulting from the implementation of this totalitarian doctrine. A French philosopher described that system as barbarism with a human face. Imagine what would have happened if Europe after the war had defended the principles of totalitarianism? It would now be like Eastern Europe. I say that the doctrine of Marksist, the system it gave rise to, is undoubtedly the most tragic experiment humanity has ever gone through. It is condemned; it is essential that people become greatly aware of these destructive dramas. Gradual misfortunes are the most dangerous misfortunes, because they are incomprehensible. There was no purpose or realism. Nevertheless, we committed ourselves to a very powerful, intensive process for adopting the constitution. After the Charter of Human Rights went to Parliament and the Socialists left Parliament to demonstrate their anti-Helsinki reflexes and provoke early elections, on 13 June 1993 we submitted the constitution to Parliament. The constitution was in Parliament, while their response was to abandon Parliament for four months to provoke early elections. After that, here before you, I proposed a Constituent Assembly. Their response was a presidential constitutional coup. At a time when the current constitutional provisions contain no article or clause authorizing the President to decree a Constituent Assembly. A Constituent Assembly would have been the prerogative of the Albanian Parliament, to be established according to criteria that could be agreed upon in Parliament. Then we would decide in full accordance with the constitutional provisions, although they allow the people to be addressed in a referendum. within, whether with international experts, likewise a broader consensus on holding a referendum is essential. To think of excluding the people from voting no is unacceptable. And if any of their experts can find even one case where a constitution was not approved by referendum and they want to remove the people’s right to do so, let them say so. I do not know of one. I think there is an abuse of the referendum. The people have their composure. The people’s verjesjta hO? Mestrahit at a time when the other peoples of Europe said YES. This does not mean that Mastrihit is a treaty that should not be voted on. This does not mean that the Norwegian people are a people with an anti-European, anti-integrationist tendency. Likewise, our draft constitution was good; the people said no, so let us improve it. Antoneta Malja, Radio Tirana: What is your opinion as head of state about the Socialists’ position on membership in the Council of Europe? The decision of the Croatian government and President Tugjman to withdraw UNPROFOR could complicate the situation beyond expectations. I am convinced that President Tugjman and the Croatian government do not intend to start a Balkan war by doing this. They have every right to exercise control over Croatian territory. What is important is whether a broad confrontation can be prevented, when they face the most dangerous demons of nationalism in Europe, such as Karaxhic, etc. Finding a compromise that would ensure the prevention of a broad conflict in the north would be the most imperative solution to avert a possible devastating large-scale conflict, which could then spread to other areas as well. In contrast with developments in the north of the Balkans are those in its south, with the different stance in relations between Greece and Turkey, and between Turkey and the European Union. I think the recent agreement between Turkey and the European Union is a great achievement for Turkey, for the French Presidency of the EU, for Europe, and for the region. I am convinced that Mero Baze, Rilindja: We saw in Shkup with President Herzog that a whereas a year ago in Bulgaria you did not oppose the Bulgarian side’s statement about a Bulgarian minority. Will there be a defined position on the existence of this minority? Answer: First, I think politicians’ duty is not to define the origins of minorities, but to respect the origins of minorities and guarantee their freedoms and rights. I can state that no minority and no citizen has been discriminated against in Albania. Albania has fulfilled and fully adheres to the Copenhagen criteria for the treatment of minorities. Second, my statement concerns a reality. Determining their origins is the task of scientists and historians, not politicians. Third, it has nothing to do with the origin or existence of the Macedonian nation, which is a factor that exists. Historically, the traditional ties between Albanians and Macedonians have also been good. Briseidа Mema, AFP: Mr President, since we are again on this issue, Skopje has recently accused you of radicalism in your policy toward Macedonia, while a certain impatience is also noticeable about Albania’s rapprochement with Greece? Answer: Albania as a whole has pursued and will continue to pursue a policy of rapprochement and cooperation with its neighbours. There has been and is no change in our policy toward Macedonia. Our position has been and remains constant. I have supported and continue to support Macedonia’s stability. At my latest meeting with President Gligorov, I proposed that he further liberalize relations between our countries. condition for stabilizing this Republic. We have supported and continue to support their right to education at all levels, in accordance with all international documents binding on states that wish to integrate into the international community. We have supported them and continue to do so with the firm conviction that the education of Albanians at every level, in universities and other institutions, is in Macedonia’s interest and represents a degree of their participation in the development and prosperity of this republic. Naturally, we have encouraged and continue to encourage dialogue between Albanian political forces and the Macedonian government, and between Albanians and Macedonians, to resolve problems. It is essential that both sides understand that Macedonia’s stability is important not only for Macedonia, just as the development and observance of democratic values are important not only for Macedonia but more broadly for the region. Pellumb Bataj, ATSH: In Elbasan, Marksist and Marxism were attacked. Does this not sound like an election campaign? How would you comment on Selami’s assertion linking Albania’s admission to the Council of Europe with the release of Fatos Nano? Finally, how do you envisage resolving the constitution issue? Answer: In Elbasan, I do not believe that what I told the students of the normal school can be interpreted as an episode in an election campaign, because an election campaign requires at least a year or more to arrive in Albania. I emphasize that the history of development has proved and demonstrated that when the two philosophical systems—the systems of Rusoi, Kant and other philosophers on the one hand, and Marxism on the other—are compared, real destruction. Developments show that where the bourgeoisie and capitalism have developed, the future has developed and democracy develops. So today nobody can prove that there is democracy without the bourgeoisie, without capitalism, or that Marxism and the bourgeoisie are compatible with each other. A typical example of this is the two systems in the East over 50 years. Let us not forget that some of today’s Eastern countries were among the most developed in the world. Some ranked eighth or thirteenth in global development. And now these countries are struggling to make the present of the developed capitalist countries of Europe their future. There is no doubt that Marxism kills the future. I do not want to personalize the issue with regard to anyone. Everyone in Albania is free to hold their political beliefs. That is true. But when the question is raised of an alternative based on the principles of Marxism, I cannot help calling on students and everyone to abandon it and every other totalitarian dogma. We must stand further away than anyone from the principles of totalitarianism. Someone may say that I do not accept the alternative. I do accept the alternative, but this is not an alternative for show; it is an alternative for power and in itself carries the seed of a great national misfortune in the future. Today, attitudes toward Marxism are very intense in post-communist countries. If the Second World War and the Nazi-fascist totalitarian systems plunged humanity into enormous destruction, after the war the communist system—the principles of Marksizt—served as the framework for the harshest dictatorship in human history. From Kamcatka to Lake Shkodra, from Korfu to Northern Deçin. On this basis, the other was made on one side and Marksizt a dogma of compatible with each other. Regarding the issue raised by Selami and his announced secret, I say that the Council of Europe has not officially presented it. The Council of Europe is not an institution that prescribes justice for a country but requires the independence of a country’s justice system. The Council of Europe has set no condition concerning the constitution, and the official document of the Commission of the Council of Europe states that Albania has no constitutional legislative condition. There are eight constitutional laws that guarantee a parliamentary system, guarantee human freedoms and rights and the separation of powers, and ensure the independent functioning of the courts. This is the Council of Europe’s conclusion regarding the constitution issue. Regarding the third question, on the constitution, the DP, more than any other political force, has made tremendous efforts to make a decision on the constitution. Its programme for the constitution says that we will work to draft a constitution that respects human freedoms and rights, guarantees the separation of powers and the independence of the judicial system. No political force can predict that it will approve the constitution, but that the next parliament will pass it. The option of the 31 March elections was always there. Then came the conclusion with an illegal commission, an unconstitutional commission under Article 44 of the constitutional provisions, which stipulates unequivocally that the commission for drafting the constitution must be approved by Parliament. They chose another route: obstruction. Naturally, consultations with everyone are necessary, whether with the constitutional political forces. The constitution; the membership in the Council of Europe? The Socialist leadership, because I am convinced that membership and the basis are in favour of Albania’s membership in the Council of Europe, while the Socialist leadership, at a meeting with a Council of Europe delegation a year and a half ago, expressed itself against Albania’s admission to the Council of Europe. They made this clear to the Commission; the Commission also conveyed this to me, while at the same time the Council of Europe Commission said that not even Zhirinovski in Russia had taken such an action. The truth is that this position of theirs met not only with opposition from the Council of Europe delegation, which expressed surprise and disapproval, including in the media, but also with opposition from quite a few influential PS members in Parliament and in its leadership. Faced with this situation, they showed that, as I understand it, recently they have said they Europe. That is more or less the chronology of the Socialist leadership’s positions on Albania’s membership in the Council of Europe. Lazer Stani, RD: How would you characterize the state of tension in the Balkans, particularly in light of some recent developments such as Papulis’s visit to Albania; Macedonia’s comments regarding your statements about the Slavic minority in our country; and the EU agreement with Turkey on customs dialogue? Answer: The Balkans are experiencing very difficult moments. These are moments of a possible Balkan war; the situation is especially grave in the north. Constitutional. full accordance with the constitutional provisions, since they allowed us to put the matter to the people in a referendum. Regardless of the result, I have said and say again that I do not criticize the decision to hold a referendum. Because I think that for us, not power but the construction of democracy, and power in the service of democracy, must be the great objectives. We were the majority; laws were being passed in Parliament, and just as in many other countries of Eastern Europe, we could easily have postponed the constitution issue. We did not postpone the constitution issue. We tried and will continue to try every possible legal solution, but naturally without accepting the provocation of early elections. I proposed a new commission, and as a compromise we put forward one of the 15 options for the division of power. What was the opposition’s response? It was this: after agreeing to the establishment of the commission, and after we made concessions in setting up the Commission, the next day they withdrew, declaring that the constitution must be approved in Parliament and that, if this Parliament did not approve it, it should be passed on to the next parliament. war; the situation is especially grave in the north. ...

Mero Baze, Rilindja: We saw in Shqip a political organization called the Pan-Macedonian Congress oppose your statement with President Herzog that the small minority in southern Albania is an unspecified Slavic minority.